Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
Remember the Repairer spikes MO ?
We need a few more of them this year.
We always had a good number of them when you were around
lol KO...
You know MO, strictly observing... and once an ENQer, always an ENQer...
Take care, MO
Welcome back MO
Great to hear from you again.
Are you going to dip your toe back in ?
Welcome back MO , hope all is well with you.
Welcome Back -
MatrixObserver, MO
Forget Enquest, I am truely pleased to see you back here sounding content and well.
All the best
Jan,
Glad to see you back posting mo,hope you're well, people on here have missed your comments,gla monkey
Hey all
Another issue I have with this Turpin Tax is that all the prior build-up news headlines were about BP, Shell etc monster profits to drive this tax, yet most (if not all) of these mentioned produce more outside the UK than in it... Dividend... lol, maybe someday
Another gripe is the vagueness of “phased out when oil and gas prices return to historically more normal prices”...
Does this include the 4years at levels during the 2010s (when $100+ normal, indexed would probably be nearing $200 p/b), or averaging over xx years, If I was AB I would seek to pin them down to actuals...
Can laws be passed with such vague parameters... silly question really...
Cheers all, MO
It appears that it’s 45p per £1 invested that can be used to offset the 25% tax the other 46p in the headline 91p doesn’t look like it can be utilised against the new levy. I think there will be another u-turn because it’s clearly not been thought through and no company will invest in the uk.
The clarity we need from the New Tax on oil, firstly is the Investments in renewable's we are going to make deductible from that 25% Tax? secondly is the 91% Tax allowance for new investment all deductible from that 25% Tax or is some of it just added too our other Tax credit recoverable from corporation Tax. Hopefully AB is working on getting that clarity if it is new investment against New Tax it I believe it could achieve good things.
I haven't claimed the tax is good for the assets we already own - it isn't. I've claimed it's not necessarily a negative for future acquisitions because purchase prices should reflect the tax. Yes, you could make the same argument about lower oil prices.
Oil prices are different as they could go back up and a purchase during a temporary fall would benefit us - although not our existing assets. Clearly if oil prices fell 50% in a month - and we made a mega acquisition at a price which reflected those lower prices - then oil went straight back up, that would benefit us. It's not how things generally work though.
BTFATH , the country is tilting g towards a fascist dictatorship. Worse still, the head honchos don't have a clue about business. Popular acclaim, daily photoshoots and pronouncements on global affairs are fabricated to improve the appearance of what is actually a shambolic bunch of self-seekers. This gang of ******s and the kiddy on treasurer will destroy the country. The oil and gas levy is only the beginning. Sunak is an over promoted yes man who could not run a bath let alone the nations finances. He should go back to monitoring direct debits, standing orders and mortgage applications.
This stupid proposal won’t get passed into law without quite a few changes, I bet the screaming back and forth behind closed doors will take a good few weeks to sort out.
Sunak calls it “ exordinary profits”
I want to know why he hasn’t cut his TAX percentage down from the exordinary profits the government are making at the pump
They are making a monstrous amount of TAX from the pumps and are unwilling to give that up !
Dirty rotten bastards
34a - that's like saying if oil prices go down, the asset prices for acquisitions go down so we can buy cheap assets at low prices, hence lower oil prices are good? Enq own assets value will also go down in such a scenario as there won't be any decent buyer for assets.
The way this seems to be setup is that 25% of profits will go as cash to gov? And if enq generates non-cash profits due to higher aaset/ppe valuation or other income statement /bs items then its a net negative as cash would need to be paid on the headline profit even if enq doesn't generate the cash via oil sales? No clarity yet.
In fact our advantage could increase. Let's assume there are no capex offsets on M&A acquisitions.
We get 75% of profits. We used to get 100%.
Competitors without tax losses get 35% of profits. They used to get 60%.
We've lost 25%. Competitors have lost 41.67%.
To be honest I don't think it'll have much impact on strategy going forward. Developing the reserves/resources we already have clearly still makes sense given commodity prices, tax losses and ability to offset tax with capex.
M&A in the north sea becomes less attractive because we go from paying 0% tax to 25% and can't offset much with capex. But it also becomes less attractive for everyone else so asset prices fall, we pay less and the economics work out about the same.
Thanks MSM
Enquest could invest overseas but for us the tax on NS is 25% until we have used up the 3bn in tax credits so it is a no brainer to invest at least any Tax liability if that new outlay is recoverable from the new tax. It read as though 91% was so if the price of oil falls by the time it is up and running the new production will have been paid for by the high oil price today if oil price stays high and the 25% tax stays in place we will still only pay that till we have used up historic credit, it all sounds like a deal set up to increase our production ASP. Lets get drilling!
Busy day in work and then family time.
I did not even check the sp from 11am and managed to get my average with 65,000 shares to 31.4p with my latest buy ins.
Am I concerned not in any way shape or form.
AB is a financial master at reducing the viewable profit and has been for years.
Net debt will be a third what it was 3 years ago from next year and meanwhile Brent approaches 120 yes 120 not 60.
What a fooking overeaction.
Until the bumbling scarecrow is out of of power we will all be poorer.
Can someone stump up a one way ticket to Rwanda for him his sweetheart and his 50 kids.
What on earth has this country come to :-(
The violent downward share price action of most NS oilers clearly proves that -although the effects of the levy are not life threathening- nothing scares investors more than legal uncertainty. The British government will shoot itself in the head, not in the foot, i am convinced. What kind of security does it inspire when you read "when oil price is back to normal, levy will end"? Why surcharge a sector that has come out of a terrible 5 years, why surcharge companies that barely managed to survive an onslaught of different factors -covid demand destruction, price war Opec-Russia, crazy overproduction by the shalers, low hedges forced upon by banks-, were not even able to pay dividends to their shareholders already the very first year those companies can start to turn the page? Was the government supportive of ENq and others when they lived through those hard times? I don't think so. On the contrary. The damage is done, getting rid of the reputation of "unreliable" won't be easy. Sentiment rules!
All the operators in the NS should as one say no more investment until the 65% tax is removed. All new investment goes overseas where you get much more than 35%. If they accept this nonsense tax now in 2025 or sooner they will raise it to a 70-80% rate.
Hi MakeSomeMoney,
I get that but I'm here because I believe the demand is unassailable for many years and energy sovereignty has recently become a thing. There is leverage there and I think that could weigh in favour of efficient late life explorers.
I think the "windfall" will be called out for the **** poor, "distractionary" (thanks for whoever posted the word) tactic that it is. I therefoe think there is protection on the downside . . .because we need the black stuff!!!
Wouldn't normally get political preferring the methodology of **** jokes. If ony it was a Robin Hood tax. Dick Turpin was not a nice chap.
GLAXX
Therapist : There is an argument to say develop NS to benefit from the incentive (suffer less from the levy) or say frikk you and go elsewhere. Oil keeps rising and there is another U Turn in the offing.
Whilst it encourages investment, there is no easy oil in NS any more. If Enq invest in Bressay and Bentley now to reduce tax what guarantees are there that by the time they are online the poo will make it worthwhile... And obviously then there is the fact that the precedent has been set.... If poo is really high then will Tax be hiked in another way to suit the government agenda at that time. Whichever way you look at it the upside is capped with little protection on the down side.
I think you misread Rom. The FTSE 100 ref is to Shell:
North Sea specialist EnQuest is drawing up plans to expand outside UK waters in an early sign of the impact of the Chancellor’s levy on oil and gas companies.
It came as Shell warned that the tax puts a decade of investment at risk.
The FTSE 100 oil giant, which is also understood to have raised its concerns directly with the Government, said: “In its current form the levy creates uncertainty about the investment climate for North Sea oil and gas for the coming years.
Hi,
From KO mentioned telegraph article:
"One of the North Sea's biggest energy producers is preparing to invest in South East Asia instead of the UK in the wake of Rishi Sunak's £5bn windfall tax.
North Sea specialist EnQuest is drawing up plans to expand outside UK waters in an early sign of the impact of the Chancellor’s levy on oil and gas companies.
EnQuest decided to narrow its focus to the UK and Malaysia in the wake of the oil price crash. But it is understood the company has been looking at further expanding its presence in South East Asia amid the rising tax burden on UK oil and gas producers.
A City source said the company had found the Malaysian government supportive and is open to locations outside the North Sea. It planned to calculate the impact of the Chancellor's new measures before making any decisions.
A spokesman for the company said: “EnQuest is committed to the North Sea. We are currently executing our largest capital investment programme since 2014 and our plans are continuing unchanged.
“We have invested around £4bn in the North Sea over the past 12 years, and maintain our view that long-term, stable taxation arrangements are important for the industry."
This is the first "warning shot" from Enq who are set to lose less than 20 million 22 if Jeffries are to be believed.
I wonder what the big boys will say about the levy costs?
There is an argument to say develop NS to benefit from the incentive (suffer less from the levy) or say frikk you and go elsewhere. Oil keeps rising and there is another U Turn in the offing.
Either way who will challenge Sunak on the supposed £5 billion coming from the NS levy?
Malaysia, gas price, PM409.
Malaysian production and profits protected from Uk regs.
GLAXXX
It is encouraging MSM but errors like that are amateurish and undermine the story. I emailed IR to see if they can at least get the online edition corrected. I don't have access to the full article just the headline.